IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] The bottom is /112 (was: RE: Extending a /64) -- How about new fixed bottom /80 win-win for all - epiphany at 6:54am after v6ops preso

Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com> Thu, 19 November 2020 13:58 UTC

Return-Path: <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50A743A0F49; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 05:58:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.683
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.683 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_REMOTE_IMAGE=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yMSyWdJ5d9Jn; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 05:58:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf1-x430.google.com (mail-pf1-x430.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::430]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C7E0A3A0DCA; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 05:58:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf1-x430.google.com with SMTP id 10so4575667pfp.5; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 05:58:44 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=r1SGj7IUhat5xU/exxsrw1wTKd1zg5mJpOQz5tbDxf0=; b=pTIok1LBc1Du0DwlAZVtMRGCH9vejGdJQ4k1zzDGAMEB054zTl/9ChcEGvUwBpOZLt Cdo0RUvfNGkY+uj3mg2Hv+vG/f/u8bqGDIxstX9ScQAmk8FvdP3MAsp2lco+co+KWYhx VjhBLQ4kFrK5+UZqh24h9yN5gASk2BKCVKM/AUZ09KO+wzIeu7UwfzdTsw/Y7y/CV95B PptI0MebZw4Q4IzZTA94XEoas/yjCl3oN09RrH0G4OdlBS85FPFr3Kz3YEBhPaxE8U0C 2iYo5uO4x0BbhdFvsZBBKqIO060gL6QJPAy1Psraf01BzEwPFPMEjEZdiDRYaE17JM/c 4gkw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=r1SGj7IUhat5xU/exxsrw1wTKd1zg5mJpOQz5tbDxf0=; b=bWFbaEhXal8fGzpmsYKxgIDfMb8NGGxryGD4pfit/j1lzoXGMpnx89GT6OhDFMohGW NfrsvR1IUXy+Z/lxCHUudzPYjqJxvBe1wLvCbZdmOfX6PjR4uOx46YuBrFTSDfWlkYPO TnlF/1ShShCNEEff3VDuNyeVuNqQZrkXaPQXjDuoum0Sp/uoEHbBGoJpVhkkO694Td7y KxFwd7Rqf0V0XIn9V4xKyVyNfDc3oauXLDjgBZjm4i/UbM0+/rT4NEiZkbX4+hGTPgkG zwW8ML8MXWByr5sZ2cPbKHv3c91874DZctEJIudG4Tu3jjayZkhsDjDr4Bpjqy501ly2 k7YA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530i6JVCKYSEDTVOpmM1Px/18zmmSlo9WzNfnMNyn06lI2AMpW6/ oPr3c1H1uDiBdNyRWiiYcrQAWVZ3b4R+XgOLLcKbvzNv3d0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxGTBzMvTksXcKewpVq7Be65v3NdEHsXaORjF1nOXfNL0qOZ/m+bwjFQpMVMViq3Qc0n9RhPyhx6jknV0swkSQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:c254:: with SMTP id d20mr4676594pjx.112.1605794324033; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 05:58:44 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CABNhwV3fj-e9bEemivcNovnD3SZvKm8ZjFKp7BmusnPcgyznFQ@mail.gmail.com> <7ED24CC7-A719-4E9B-A5DC-3BA8EA7E3929@consulintel.es> <CABNhwV19neE3U_AisNp2nDUF4bWB8P8xHNEznDevZLE9amFTRA@mail.gmail.com> <0F78C18B-7AD6-4AC7-AF1F-CA1ADCDEA6AB@employees.org>
In-Reply-To: <0F78C18B-7AD6-4AC7-AF1F-CA1ADCDEA6AB@employees.org>
From: Gyan Mishra <hayabusagsm@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 08:58:33 -0500
Message-ID: <CABNhwV3bCss9y7cT6w2i+LKWBh1viPSXBM-CTaK+GVDyPS2D8w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] The bottom is /112 (was: RE: Extending a /64) -- How about new fixed bottom /80 win-win for all - epiphany at 6:54am after v6ops preso
To: otroan@employees.org
Cc: 6MAN <6man@ietf.org>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet=40consulintel.es@dmarc.ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000044332605b4762081"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/Hwy10sEz4bAjYwThYUZ3KuFp-yg>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:58:46 -0000

On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 8:51 AM <otroan@employees.org> wrote:

> > That solves one problem but does not solve the 64share v2 issue as we
> have to still modify
> > RFC 4861 for mobile to accept shorter prefix.
>
> As Lorenzo explained during the meeting reusing the PIO isn't going to
> work.


   Gyan> Understood.  Lorenzo made a key point which is why I am bringing
up that we would need a new option as we defined in the variable slaac
solutions draft.

>
>
> You would need a new option. It would likely be useful for the requesting
> router to indicate interest in the option. Even hinting at what prefix size
> it was expecting.
> Now can you explain to me again the reasons why this approach is better
> than using the existing DHPCv6 protocol packets?


    3GPP gateway does not support DHCPv6

>
>
> Best regards,
> Ole

-- 

<http://www.verizon.com/>

*Gyan Mishra*

*Network Solutions A**rchitect *



*M 301 502-134713101 Columbia Pike *Silver Spring, MD

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email